Hi Stan,

Interesting point about the implicit conversion problems. I suspect the
effect is similar as when binding a java.sql.Timestamp to an Oracle DATE
column, when instead of truncating the bind variable to fit the DATE type,
the DATE column is widened via an INTERNAL_FUNCTION, preventing index
usage. Is that what you're experiencing?

I've blogged about the above case here:
http://blog.jooq.org/2014/12/22/are-you-binding-your-oracle-dates-correctly-i-bet-you-arent/

The easiest way to circumvent that is by using a custom data type binding,
just as for the above problem:
http://www.jooq.org/doc/latest/manual/sql-building/queryparts/custom-bindings

With an org.jooq.Binding, you can override the DefaultBinding behaviour and
bind a String instead, and cast that to CHAR(1) in the generated SQL:
CAST(? AS CHAR(1)).

It would be interesting to see if we should pursue this on the jOOQ side
and provide something out of the box... What do you think?

Cheers,
Lukas

2015-12-15 9:07 GMT+01:00 Stanislas Nanchen <[email protected]>:

> Hi everyone,
>
> We have a database on Oracle that uses char(1) to encode boolean values.
> Unfortunately, Jooq inlines boolean values for Oracle with the numbres 1
> and 0 (hardcoded in the class DefaultBinding, private method toSQL).
> To avoid implicit conversion problems, we would like to have boolean
> encoded as '1' and '0'.
>
> Is there a way to tell Jooq to encode the booleans differently?
>
> Thanks!
> Stan.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "jOOQ User Group" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jOOQ 
User Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to